I need an explanation that makes sense

I was watching the movie The Debt last night. I was wondering if in a few years the Palestinians won't have a group to go after Zionist war criminals. As an atheist myself I was also wondering how Jewish Atheist support Israel because the primary reason for its existence is based on the Bible and the world of the sky god. I'm not arguing why Jews want to live there, I'm asking how do Jewish Atheist justify their support of the State of Israel? I mean I'm physically looking at the "Jew" and I see a European, not a brown skinned mixed human being, but a person that is indistinct from a western European. None of this is logical. Seriously, I would like to have this make some sense.

Replies to This Discussion

I've never seen "The Debt" but I do know pretty well the real history of the Jews, and their situation in the world today. The first thing you need to understand about Jews--probably more so than most other religious groups--is that they're more an ethnic group than a religion. Sure, there are Jewish religious nuts and moderate Jewish believers, but Jews are probably bound together more by 2000+ years of persecution than by their religious beliefs. I suspect most Jews (including Atheist Jews) know, quite correctly, that most groups and individuals that openly hate Jews do so regardless of any religious beliefs. For Islamic, Nazi, Klan, ultra-Catholic or almost any group you pick that is vocally contemptuous and able to persecute Jews, there is nothing the Jew can say or do to tame that persecution. They can't convert, they can't accept the Jew-hater's politics-- nothing. Hitler's Nuremberg laws defined a Jew by his ancestry, not his beliefs. You can find some rare exceptions to this in Islamic and Catholic persecution of Jews but nothing to which any Jew with a sense of survival should pay any attention. Jews know that there are many powerful factions in the world ready to kill them for the crime of having been born. This simple, demonstrable fact necessitates a safe haven in the minds of many Jews, as it would in the mind of any sensible person living in such a world. One might argue that the west is such a safe haven, with it's secular governance, but less than 100 years of secular governance can seem insignificant compared with well over 2000 years of persecution (some merely perceived, but much of it horribly real) in that same west.
Next you have to consider the historical facts; not from the start of late 19th century Zionism, but at least as far back as the Diaspora. Religious Jews who claim a Jewish right to Israel based on a divine promise seem like babbling idiots to most atheistic and even moderate believing Jews. But atheistic and moderate Jews do know that Jews had a homeland for a long time before the diaspora and that after the diaspora their ancestors suffered extraordinary persecution for about 2000 years (people who compare the plight of Palestinians to that of persecuted Jews display an encyclopedic ignorance of Jewish persecution that could be cured with about a half an hour of honest research about pograms, the holocaust and/or the inquisition). There were actually two diasporas for the Jews, the first when the Babylonians conquered them around 600 BCE (at which point they'd been living there for about 760 years), and the second under the Roman emperor, Hadrian, around 135 AD (they'd returned from their Babylonian exile around 140 BCE, so this place was their homeland first for about 760 years, then again for about 275 years). Simply put, most Jews, atheist or otherwise, perceive that the safest insurance against another 2000 year period of murderous persecution is to regain a homeland that was historically theirs for over 1000 years, in total, and to keep its citizenry safe from violent, virulent bigots.
Finally, the modern state of Israel is a largely secular, representative government. Certainly way more so than any of its sovereign or insurgent enemies. They have freedom of speech and religion, equality of the sexes, and a reverence for secular enlightenment values comparable to what we see in the west. For any atheist, Jewish or otherwise, to side with the theocratic, misogynistic cultures that are almost certain to fill the vacuum left by the disappearance of Israel seems self destructive. If you had to live in the middle east, where would you rather be an atheist (or a woman, a political dissident, or a homosexual, or a Christian, or a Buddhist, or any kind of non-Muslim, for that matter)? Would you rather live in modern Israel, or in whatever the area would be under an Islamic system of government? Israel may have embarrassing "My Lai media moments", but so does every country, including western, secular representational ones. Such moments are no reason to encourage the conquest and oppression of some theocratic faction over an imperfect but secularly enlightened government.

Trudy I don't mean to be nasty or a smartass but what you wrote I already heard hundreds of times. It doesn't explain the Khazar Conversion, the language of the Jew, Yiddish vs. Hebrew, the Euro-phenotypes etc., The Balfour agreement/declaration, The Nazi-Zionist collaboration,The archaeological evidence ( or lack thereof) of "Hebrew (Jewish) ancient sites,(ie: David's Kingdom) the origin/use of the word Jew to identify this "ethnic" group and so many other things related to the book of the sky gods.

The quick answer is a simple summation of my previous post:
1. Atheists (or anyone, for that matter) with identifiable Jewish ancestry can reasonably fear for his or her life and the lives of his/her loved ones for the crime of having been born a Jew. This fear can be somewhat tamed so long as a Jewish homeland/safe haven exists, where Jews can flee a repeat holocaust/inquisition/pogram/etc.
2. Such a homeland did exist for over 1000 years in recorded history, and the methods by which it was lost (conquest by Babylonians and expulsion by a Roman emperor) seem unjust and causative of 2000+ years of horrific persecution. Thus to many Jews (and any fair-minded person with a good knowledge of the relevant history), a reversal of the Babylonian and Roman evictions seems the fairest way to provide a needed, reliable, safe haven for Jews.
3. To anyone seeking the spread of secular, Humanist, Enlightenment values, the modern state of Israel, with its relatively great degree of secular representational governance and free speech and freedom of/from religion is vastly preferable to any Islamic government that would replace it.
As to 'the Khazar Conversion..., Yiddish vs. Hebrew..., Euro-phenotypes..., the Balfour Declaration..., lack of evidence for the Davidic Kingdom', these are all truisms of history that are hardly unlikely for any culturally isolated group living in Europe for the 2000+ years that they did. The Khazar conversion seems to have happened because Khazar leadership of a certain period thought it politically expedient. Yiddish and Euro-phenotypes evolved over a long period of Jews living in German-speaking regions and interbreeding with non-Jewish Europeans. The Balfour Declaration was the result of European Jewish attempts to restore their homeland via peaceful negotiation with the controlling power of the region--Great Britain. As to the lack of evidence for the Davidic Kingdom--that's irrelevant. The existence of Israel and Judea, and their Babylonian and Roman evictions are historical facts. None of these things are particularly damning for Jews, or justify forcing all members of the ethnic group to have to forever live in fear of a repeat holocaust/inquisition/pogram, with no safe refuge.
As for the 'Nazi-Zionist collaboration', I could find nothing in Britannica online or Wikipedia (Wikipedia has an enormously detailed and referenced entry on Nazi Collaboration with no mention of Nazi-Zionist collaboration). What I did find on the topic were many Internet sites that were plainly antisemitic propaganda, some seeking to blame the whole horror of the third reich on "the Jews". Even if there were a shred of truth to it--even if some Zionists sought to achieve their objective by way of Nazi collaboration--this would hardly negate the need for a safe haven for Jews, or the many valid arguments of most Zionists.

Trudy thank you but I asked how can they support the State of Israel, not why they want to live there. However I do question your premise that it's a "safe" haven for Jews. I don't think that will happen until it becomes a nation like the U.S. having put the indigenous people in "place."

Isn't the basis for the Jew being in Israel the biblical story of Jacob and Esau? Let's stick with that and as for the rest, I think there's plenty of documentation about the Khazar conversion and the later Rus scattering them throughout Russia and Western Europe. Just a point I'd like to mention you, say the Jews were isolated in Europe then you say they mixed with non Jews. Which was it? Trudy I don't want to get into all that, it's like reading the bible to me. Just make clear the sky god's gift to Jacob and how Atheist discount the sky god's existence and by default discount that the State of Israel is a legitimate entity.

"these are all truisms of history that are hardly unlikely for any culturally isolated group living in Europe for the 2000+ years that they did."-Trudy

"Yiddish and Euro-phenotypes evolved over a long period of Jews living in German-speaking regions and interbreeding with non-Jewish Europeans"-Trudy

Isolation would allow them to keep their language. Even if they were a "culturally" isolated group there's a good chance that since the Jews were so steeped in their historic religion they'd keep Hebrew too.. But like I said this history is like reading the bible or a speech by Mitt Romney.

"... your premise that it's a "safe" haven for Jews. I don't think that will happen until it becomes a nation like the U.S. having put the indigenous people in "place.”"

I don’t know about them needing to ‘put the indigenous people in place’. As an atheist living in a nuclear, biochemical age, I don’t think anyone is safe as long as we continue to enable theocratic regimes or any kinds of regimes that don’t provide for a secular, representational government with church/state separation, freedom of speech and belief, and a commitment to rational thought as the foundation for political decision-making. As far as post-diaspora Jews are concerned, they’re almost certainly safER with a homeland than they were for almost 2000 years without one.

“Isn't the basis for the Jew being in Israel the biblical story of Jacob and Esau? Let's stick with that… Just make clear the sky god's gift to Jacob and how Atheist discount the sky god's existence and by default discount that the State of Israel is a legitimate entity.”

No, that is not the basis for the Jew being in Israel. That is ONE argument embraced by religious Jews and some religious Christians. That argument is utterly dismissed by most moderate and all atheistic Jews, and all rational defenders of Israel. If you can’t rebut the rational arguments then accept that they have validity; don’t just dismiss the rational arguments and insist I try to use irrational religious nuttiness that you can easily rebut. A refusal to accept a rational argument or offer a rational rebuttal seems like a sign of anti-Semitism in this particular discussion. So, for that matter, is a willingness to evict Jews from Israel, without so much as a hint of what ought to be done instead of a Jewish homeland, to prevent repeat holocausts. It’s not just bigoted, it’s jaw-droppingly politically short-sighted to think the world’s Jews would just lie down and accept it. Do you think they’d say, “Sure, we’ve been slaughtered by the millions, in the 20th century alone, to say nothing of the 1800+ years before the Holocaust. But that’s okay, we don’t need a safe haven or a national defense, we’ll just hope for the best when the next Jewish genocide rolls around.”

“I think there's plenty of documentation about the Khazar conversion…”

I never denied the Khazar conversion. For that matter, you’ve never explained its relevance to the discussion.

“you, say the Jews were isolated in Europe then you say they mixed with non Jews. Which was it?”

Wow, you’ve really caught me in a contradiction there. Unless of course, the Jews are not some monolithic entity that must either be culturally isolated or part of a cultural melting pot (you know—the kind of view of Jews that a bigot might hold). There were millions of post-diaspora Jews living mostly in Europe and southwest Asia for about the last 2600+ years (going back, at least to the Babylonian Diaspora). Some stayed in closed, religious, highly culturally isolated communities; some were so intermixed they eventually lost all association with Judaism (there are many people who have no knowledge of any Jewish ancestry but whose DNA shows a departure from a Jewish community of the past). These are two ends of a wide spectrum and over the past 2600+ years millions of Jews have lived all over that spectrum. There’s plenty of room and time on that spectrum for the ancient language of Hebrew to have survived as well as for the evolution of new languages, like Yiddish, Ladino, Judeo-Arabic, etc.

lol I hope you aren't implying I'm a bigot or "anti-semetic" because I question the history of the Jews? What it can't be questioned and just accepted? I just find it strange that an entire "group" of people CONVERTED to Judaism and then we look at the Jews today and most of those people are from the same area/and share the same phenotype as those who converted and speak the same tongue. All this in 2600 years???

No matter, so if the religions account isn't the reason for the State of Israel, what is? What is the rational argument? That this is there homeland? Why is that so. because the bible tells me so?

And please don't talk to a person with First Peoples and African blood about a holocaust.

Well, I’m not sure what about Jewish history it is that you question. There are some doubts that, if expressed are a definite indicator of anti-Semitism (Holocaust denial, for example). As to the Khazar conversion, which you’ve repeatedly brought up and now seem to hint at, that too, according to Wikipedia, is a discredited claim typically asserted by anti-Semites.

Per Wikipedia:

“Although the Khazar theory is contradicted by genetic evidence and has little support amongst academics, in the Arab world it still enjoys popularity among anti-Zionists and antisemites. Such proponents argue that if Ashkenazi Jews are primarily Khazar and not Semitic in origin, they would have no historical claim to Israel, nor would they be the subject of God's Biblical promise of Canaan to the Israelites, thus undermining the theological basis of both Jewish religious Zionists and Christian Zionists. In the 1970s and 80s the Khazar theory was also advanced by some Russian chauvinist antisemites, particularly the historian Lev Gumilyov, who portrayed "Judeo-Khazars" as having repeatedly sabotaged Russia's development since the 7th century.”

Also from Wikipedia:

A 1999 study by Hammer et al., published in the Proceedings of the United States National Academy of Sciences compared the Y chromosomes of Ashkenazi, Roman, North African, Kurdish, Near Eastern, Yemenite, and Ethiopian Jews with 16 non-Jewish groups from similar geographic locations. It found that "Despite their long-term residence in different countries and isolation from one another, most Jewish populations were not significantly different from one another at the genetic level... The results support the hypothesis that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population…””

No, I don’t say that Israel was previously a long-time Jewish homeland “because the bible tells me so”. There is plenty of genetic and archeological evidence to support this--ancient artifacts, Roman history, etc. A discredited theory about the ancestry of Ashkenazi Jews (those are the only Jews the Khazar theory even addresses) is not even remotely enough to ignore the need to reverse the Diaspora. Even if the Khazar theory had a shred of truth to it, it wouldn’t disprove the well established historical fact that Jews lived in that region for a long time.

As to whether or not you are a bigot, I don’t know—you certainly write like someone who is ignorant of Jewish history in a way that conveniently helps you rationalize the idea that Israel should not exist. The question is—do you take the anti-Israel position because of your ignorance (many people do this, and I don’t think they’re bigots—they’re just ignorant) or do you embrace the ignorance and seek to spread the ignorance because of its supportive value to an anti-Israel position (that would be bigotry). In either case, it’s at least a bit anti-Semitic to be anti-Israel without acknowledging the need for some credible answer to the very real need for which Israel was established—the need for a safe haven for people genocidally oppressed for their Jewish ancestry for 2000+ years.

lol so academia and media is predominately controlled by Jews (of course you'll deny that too) and you keep throwing their research as fact. It's akin to the early research of the European academics and their "racial" theories. A "Jewish Gene" from four women..Tell me during the conversion in the 8th Century, had miscegenation btw the Hebrews/Arabs who lived there and Khazars occur?

Why did England have to give Palestine to the "Jews" if it was their homeland already? Mind you I'm not saying there weren't some people who lived in the region who practiced the Hebrew religion, but they are a different phenotype/origin than the Ashkenazim.

I see you also discredited the writings of Jews who have been silenced...Look I don't want to argue with you, it's like arguing with a xtian. Just one last question. Are "Jews" the same as Hebrews? If so why didn't they keep their ancient name/language and identity? They weren't subjected to the racial/cultural removal of their heritage like the Africa Americans. Even in Nazi Germany, they were never denied to practice being a "Jew."

And of course you know that Palestine was a colony of Egypt whose people revered Is(is)-Ra-as king (El). That Judea and Israel where later Geographical locations and not the name of the people, they were called Judahans and not "Jews" and the Is-Ra-El's were called Israelites. The Cannanites were Black people.

Sorry Charlie but the truth doesn't add up..too many discrepancies. But it's OK for now. And I don't care about a Jew, a Black, an Asian, I just want the historical truth because it's been so distorted..stop with the anti-semetic bull, that's like me calling you a racist because you support the people who gave South Africa nuclear weapons.

Trudy, I don't want to get locked up or worst yet have my livelihood denied because I seek the truth of the history of the Jews. Yes, the Zionist have become that powerful in the United States. But you'll deny that too.. Easy girl.

I was thinking of you when I read this Trudy...If we where in Arizona (maybe other states later) and you said I was being "anti-semetic" (racism is harder to prove with hip hop making nigger a household word and the lack of unity among Blacks) with my comments about the history of the Jews, you could send me to jail. It would be very likely I'd get either a negro judge or a Jewish one, in which case I'd be toast.

If you are bored you can read the confession of these "self-hating" Jew Benjamin Freedmen:

Ask yourself with conflicting historical evidence and books like the above, don't you think there's a possibility that something is amiss? I didn't even mention the Black scholars because I know you'd immediately discount them as your privilege allows. Again I say, we need the truth.

Trudy here's an aside. did you know that there were black and white Khazars? Of course with the academic premise that Blacks accomplished nothing in history, they'd surely deny that those "Black" Khazars where really a different "class" or something of the sort of Khazar. But if you study other text, you'll find that African artifacts were found in area of Georgia and the Southern Russia from antiquity. But of course European scholarship would never connect the two that those Blacks may have been Hebrews that taught the Khazars the essence of the Hebrew religion. One thing that I also find fascinating is the possibility of the original "Hebrews" being the invading Hyksos or Haribu of ancient Egypt and they converted many of the African into the religion of Seth and finally gained ground when Akhnanten became Pharaoh.